Main page

Talk page

Submissions
Category — List (sorting)

Showcase

Participants
Apply — By subject

Reviewing instructions

Help desk

Backlog
drives

Shortcuts

Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
- For questions on how to use or edit Wikipedia, visit the Teahouse.
- For unrelated questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
- Create a draft via Article wizard or request an article at requested articles.
Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.

Ask a new question
Please check back often for answers.

Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions

Top of page
Table of Contents
Today's posts
Bottom of page

May 15

Review of Draft:Michael Lord M Smith

Can someone help me check if this draft on: Michael Lord M Smith does meet all the writing criteria of wikipedia. That are the chases of this article getting swift approval. If you think there's any amendment that needs to be down, kindly feel free to edit it and implement it. If it's alright kindly let me know as well. No need of ignoring it, just give your kind response. Thanks. (Microbilo (talk) 02:03, 15 May 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Hi,

Could you please provide information on why the article was not accepted for publishing?

Thanks & Regards, Ankush — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.8.2.69 (talk) 09:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which article? Please provide a link to the page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:32, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Draft:Sinenjongo times

what was missing in my article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkqusquared47 (talk • contribs) 13:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nkqusquared47. The primary thing it's missing is an indication of what your proposed article is actually about. You mention a school, burning buildings, upset students, etc. but you don't even say what country they are in. And what is "Sinenjongo times"? Is it a real newspaper? Why did you give your draft that title? Note that Wikipedia already has an article on Sinenjongo High School, if that's the one you are referring to. Voceditenore (talk) 15:10, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Ailene Fields

Hello, I am relatively new to Wikipedia article development and need some help on my friend Ailene Fields's article, which was created by someone else. I have added some cites and links. Is there anything you can recommend to eliminate the warning box the precedes the article? Thank you, Del DeLeon (~~Del DeLeon~~) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deleondnyc (talk • contribs) 14:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, [[Deleondnyc]]. This is not a draft, it's an existing article. This help desk is only for editors enquiring about their submissions to the Articles for Creation process. For general help questions like yours, I suggest you go the Wikipedia Teahouse, "a friendly place to help new editors become accustomed to Wikipedia culture, ask questions, and develop community relationships". Voceditenore (talk) 14:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:D1ofBerks/sandbox

Thank you for your recent help. My endeavors are currently in my Sandbox: Wikipedia talk: Articles for Creation/Spectrum of a Chirp Pulse. I wish to add them to the existing article "Chirp". (Following your advice, I believe that I've sorted out my multiple references and removed all my "op. cits."). Do I highlight the text in my Sandbox (or on a copy I have in Wordpad) and press 'copy' to get it onto my clipboard, then in the article select the 'edit' button on an existing paragraph and do a paste? If so, which paragraph should I select? The last four edits are labeled 'Key chirp', 'See also', 'References' and 'External links'. This is a new experience for me and I don't want to break anything! Regards David D1ofBerks (talk) 15:19, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note. The article in question is Chirp. Voceditenore (talk) 15:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bernardo Ruiz

Hello Reviewers,

I need help with, I believe, disambiguation. I am submitting the Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bernardo Ruiz. There is already an entry for Bernardo Ruiz, but it is a different person. Can I append the heading with something like "Bernardo Ruiz, Filmmaker" ? Thanks for your patience and guidance! Cyber Shepherd (talk) 17:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Usually it is fine to just create and submit the page, and the reviewer will work out themselves what disambiguation would be best. The only exception is if both Bernardo Ruiz people are filmmakers from a similar era, in which case the reviewer might mistakenly think you are trying to create an article that already exists. But if no such confusion is likely, the reviewer will deal with it appropriately when the article is created. Your draft will make clear what the person you are writing about is best known for. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:30, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 16

Review of Draft:Essaï Altounian

Can you please tell me why me article was declined?

Aniina21 (talk) 03:51, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Aniina21:

Declined "Reads like an essay, poor formatting, no inline citations. Needs a bit of work on it." I declined it a second time for good measure. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/iThEC

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/iThEC This is the very first article I've ever written in Wikipedia so I'm not at all sure I dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's. Why does the box "Draft article not currently submitted for review." appear at the top? I already clicked twice the "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" button. Thanks for your time, Czkraal (talk) 08:55, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

viktoriya ananyan

i would highly appreciate an article about ballet dancer Viktoriya Ananyan because she deserves it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.125.135 (talk) 12:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had a very quick look around for reliable sources that discuss Ananyan in detail, and could find very little, even in the Dutch language. So possibly she is not yet notable enough by Wikipedia's standards for there to be an article about her. However, if you can find such sources, or reliable sources that confirm that she meets Wikipedia:CREATIVE, you could list the sources in an entry at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Re: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Altared I recieved a message that the article was not accepted, and it stated “…Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission…” Please help: Where do I find this? Who is the reviewer? Where are the comments? Please advise. Thank you.Contributor4376 (talk) 12:13, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Altared Re: “Altared” article rejected - Hello; I read the reviewer comments from "FoCuSandLeArN", and the notability/verifiable rules, and it seems that my article has met the criteria. There are hundreds of articles on Wikipedia of bands that have lesser notability and verifiability. Please advise. Thank you, Contributor4376 Contributor4376 (talk) 12:49, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonoma Barracks

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonoma Barracks Please remove the draft from the review queue I’ve revised ‘Presidio of Sonoma’ to incorporate the additional information. Thank you. Dean95452 (talk) 15:09, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Too late, I reviewed and accepted it a few hours ago. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look like this has caused any problems, but a few more eyes on both articles would be appreciated. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 05:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Matt Katz-Bohen

Hi! Would you please look at my Wikipedia draft article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Matt_Katz-Bohen

And I have created a Talk page for it where I walk through the ways that Matt is indeed a notable musician. Thank you!

````Michelle```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michelle.Shinn (talk • contribs) 16:23, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please resubmit it and I'll accept it (it will still need a lot of work though). --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Kankaraj sarma/sandbox

how session start in php?--Kankaraj sarma (talk) 16:27, 16 May 2014 (UTC)--Kankaraj sarma (talk) 16:27, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Kankaraj sarma. This page is only for questions about submissions to Wikipedia through the articles for creation process. You can try asking your question at the computing reference desk. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Beny Tchaicovsky

I would like to learn if the article I wrote about an artist bio is ready to be reviewed and accepted. I have been working on it and learning how to create a wikipedia article. I would really appreciate to get a feedback about this article which is waiting to be reviewed. I would like to know if there are mistakes I need to correct further? it has been a learning process since I started working on it in February, researching and noting all the 3rd part references to this artist's achievement. Thank you for your feedback in advance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Melitta2012/sandbox Melitta 21:11, 16 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melitta2012 (talk • contribs)

To editor Melitta2012: One problem that is still there is external links. According to Wikipedia's guideline on external links, they should not be used within the main text of the article. Some of the links can be transformed into footnotes. It's okay to have a sentence like this: "His paintings have been exhibited in France,^[1] Germany,^[2] Brazil^[3] and the United States^[4]." Links to his work should be removed. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 17

Help

I was reviewing your response and was wondering exactly how do I prove the content in the article, and avoid copyright infringement upon a book. I was planning on building this article over time as I won't be able to do it all at once because of time constraints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superhero97 (talk • contribs) 19:49, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Superhero97. Essentially, you write the article in your own words and cite your sources. The most common and "technologically advanced" way to cite your sources is to use footnotes, those little numbers:.^[1]

The unoffical two-step guide to footnotes:

Right after some information that comes from a specific source, add the code <ref>[Source information here]</ref> The source information should include title, author, date, publisher, and so on. If you want, you can use citation templates in the source information to make a consistent format automatically.
```
Some information you got from a book.<ref>[A book]</ref> Something you got from another book.<ref>[Another book]</ref>
```
At the end of the article, add the code {{reflist}} in a new section called "References":
```
== References ==
{{reflist}}
```

Reply if you have any more questions. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:06, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

I'm afraid I'm a bit confused. I submitted an article:Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joan Walsh Anglund At the top of the page is the statement, "Article not currently submitted for review." At the bottom of the page it states, "Review waiting." Have I actually submitted my article, or is it sitting in limbo? Please let me know so that I can submit it correctly. Thank you so very much. Tony Davies (jwafan)Jwafan (talk) 20:00, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jwafan. Don't worry, it is submitted. To avoid any further confusion, I've removed the "not currently submitted" notice and moved the "review waiting" notice to the top.

While you're waiting, you can continue improving the article. You should definitely cite more sources to show notability; otherwise it is likely to be declined. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:06, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here Catherine Burks-Brooks

I need to know why my submission was declined please i need this for a school assignment Eatienza1 Eatienza1 (talk) 21:42, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note, submission is at User:Eatienza1/sandbox.

Articles for Creation submissions can take a very long time to get reviewed, for example a month. There is also no guarantee of the article being accepted when it is reviewed. So this is not an ideal task for a school assignment. You may wish to give whoever is marking the assignment the direct internet link (some neophytes call it a "shortcut") to the work you have done, which is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Eatienza1/sandbox

In the meantime you could read WP:CHEATSHEET and WP:REFB for how to improve the layout of your submission. It would also benefit from additional reliable sources to help demonstrate the notability of the person. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:44, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Communication Challenges with Agile distributed Virtual teams

What does it mean when an article is rejected because "it reads more like an essay than a Wikipedia article?" What corrections do I need to make to it to make it better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Precious745 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles should be a balanced synthesis of what authoritative sources have said about the subject. If your article contains your own opinion, or opinions/arguments that haven't been widely expressed elsewhere, it is likely to be rejected as 'essay-like'. Because I can't find the draft you refer to, I can't really comment specifically than that. Hope that helps! Sionk (talk) 10:32, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 18

Review of Cornforth - Profile

Hi, I am most curious about why my article submission was declined. It was done to link with the information you have about the Makaton Vocabulary and my involvement at its' inception.

Many thanks for your assistance in this matter. Anthony Cornforth (Tony) --Acornforth (talk) 12:27, 18 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acornforth (talk • contribs) 12:23, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your article could have been declined for several reasons, in all honesty. It is unsourced (all Wikipedia articles need to be verifiable). Also (as the current decline reason says) it does not explain why the subject (YOU) is 'notable'. Autobigraphies are strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, I'm afraid. This one seems to be nothing more than, dare I say, a life story of an unremarkable person. If you have achieved something remarkable, or widely recognised, then this will need to be described and well-sourced. Sionk (talk) 10:39, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

can you please explain me why my article got rejected ? and what al modifications have to done after resubmitting it. please detail it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bibingt (talk • contribs) 16:21, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm presuming your article is an autobiography. These are strongly discouraged. In this instance, your only source is your own website. Wikipedia isn't a place for everyone to write profiles about themselves. Subjects need to be important and/or widely known. Sionk (talk) 10:42, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:1stArtHistorian/sandbox

Hello,

I'm trying to improve an article I wrote titled Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Kuniholm Pauper.

I want to learn how to logon to live help chat as well.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Kuniholm Pauper

Thanks,

1stArtHistorian 1stArtHistorian (talk) 17:30, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Julie de Libran

Hello, I submitted for review an article about a fashion designer yesterday: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Julie de Libran but at the top of the page I still see the message "Article not currently submitted for review." Can you please confirm that my article has joined the long list of articles waiting for review? Also, do you recommend only citing sources in english language magazines or newspaper or does it make sense to cite foreign medias too? Thank you so much for your help! Best, MichelleMlevlev (talk) 19:04, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Draft:Julie de Libran has been submitted for review (see the yellow review box at the bottom of the page). It may be a while before someone looks at it, there's a long queue at the moment. Good luck! Sionk (talk) 10:48, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Hello, Seeking advice on how to improve Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Kuniholm Pauper and resubmit. Article on artist who has been exhibited in several museums, written about in museum catalogs and elsewhere in the press. Photos of artist by credentialed press such as Ericka Schultz (Seattle Times) and Jen Graves (The Stranger). Hoping these references are adequate to support article. 1stArtHistorian 19:27, 18 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1stArtHistorian (talk • contribs)

Hi ArtHistorian, unfortunately your article isn't great at the moment and, if I was reviewing it, I would decline it because of a lack of independent, reliable proof and its promotional nature. Wikipedia articles need to be be based primarily on news/magazine/book sources which are independent of the subject. Your article seems to be primarily based on museum/gallery websites and publications which aren't independent or neutral. On top of all that, the article is riddled with non-neutral, promotional art-speak, more suitable for a promotional artist press pack than a Wikipedia encyclopedia article. I'd recommend you get back to basics, writing a simple, neutral article based on the couple of news articles/reviews you have found. Good luck! Sionk (talk) 11:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nugra Salman Prison

Hi, i have submitted an article (nugra salman) very famous prison notorious political prison in south iraq, i was a prisoner there with my family when i was only 6 years old. However the article declined and i was disappointed. Any advice on how to make this submission successful? Many thanks . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariwan27 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mariwan27: The declination by LukeSurl explained why it was declined; you should read that.

Let me give you my two cents: first, you make claims like Nugra Salman being "the most notorious desert prison in Iraq" and "The heat in the prison was overpowering". Both of those might be true but you don't properly source those assertions. You list a few general references, only a couple of which are reliable. I recommend sticking to sources like PBS, The New York Times, The LA Times, and The Chicago Tribune and stay away from other websites. When listing books like Gendered Experiences of Genocide, you need to provide page numbers for other editors to examine. WP:CITE discusses this. There also appears to be a potential neutrality issue since this is a point of contention with Kurds. Regardless of what did or did not happen there, Wikipedia seeks unbiased coverage not inflammatory invective.

The onus is on you to prove to us that your submission meets our criteria. Nugra Salman prison is an actual place and it perhaps ought to be written about. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 19

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mdrake3

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mdrake3 Hello, I am having trouble posting an article, George Brooks, to Wikipedia. What am I doing wrong? What do I need to do right? Thank you.Mdrake3 (talk) 03:08, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Hi

I recently created an article that was rejected. There was no explanation as to why? If possible could someone point me in the right direction I need to take for re-submission or possibility's as to why it was rejected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Penshurst_Victoria/sandbox

The article is at the above link

Thank You

Penshurst Victoria — Preceding unsigned comment added by Penshurst Victoria (talk • contribs) 06:26, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Peter_Olsson_(Motorsports_driver)

Hi - recently got this article published. I have introduced 3 inbound links from other racing pages so assume that the 'orphan' tag will soon be removed?

Also, we would like to get some information up about Olsson's expertise in chiropractic care. He has run a successful practice in Bedford UK for almost a decade now and can provide copies of his qualifications - but unfortunately hasn't been interviewed in local press or anything about it - so a little difficult to provide citations. What would we need to provide exactly to include a few sentences about his practice? Thanks for any guidance you can provide. Mstephens01 (talk) 06:33, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hussein Sabbour

Please I need to know why my article is declined while I am writing about a very notable character in Egypt who constructed many famous projects in Egypt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FAcebook88 (talk • contribs) 12:31, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your article was deleted four times, which suggests the community are generally not satisfied that the person is as notable as you think. For comparison of a subject who we do think is notable in Egypt and has designed famous projects, have a look at William Willcocks, who designed the Aswan Low Dam. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:19, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

The spelling of Tzemach Feldstein was changed to Cemach which is incorrect. I changed everything back to the correct spelling of "Tzemach". I was not able to change the spelling in the article header. Would you please do it so that the article is correct? respectfully js luterman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luterman (talk • contribs) 12:54, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Draft:The American Association of Anthropological Genetics

I recently received the following comments on the rejection of a Wikipedia page that I authored.

"Though the organization is notable, the article is written as a press release, and was probably copied from a previously ublished source. We already have an on their journal Human biology (journal)--consider expanding it, and restricting this article draft to the information about the Society as such."

I am new to Wikipedia authoring, so I am not sure how to edit the page the address the concerns raised. First, I am not sure what is meant by "written as a press release." I have never written a press release or a Wikipedia page, so I am not sure how they should differ from one another. Any feedback I can get on this would be helpful.

Second, I assume the reviewed was trying to say that the article was "copied from a previously ublished>>>unpublished source." This is simply not true, so I am not sure how to fix that. I was interested in writing an article about the organization, so I contacted two of the founding members to ask them questions and get suggestions from them on further reading. I combined these sources with my own firsthand knowledge as a member of the non-profit science organization.

Last, the reviewer suggests expanding on the Human biology (journal), but I am not sure why. They are connecting organizations, but also separate entities.

This is my first Wikipedia page and I am very excited to improve it to meet the reviewers expectations. Any advice or feedback would be most appreciated.

AJGenetics (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2014 (UTC)AJGenetics[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hilco Global

Hello, I recently submitted an article about Hilco Global for review and it was flagged as advertising. I am unsure why this happened and would like some explanation as to why this has occurred and possible how to fix it. We have found that many of Hilco's competitors are on wikipedia and we tried to use a similar template to draft our article. please advise at your earliest convenience. Thank you!

BenHilco (talk) 15:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)Ben[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Polacheck's Jewelers

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Polacheck's Jewelers[edit] Hi! I am new to Wiki, and I'm not sure how long the review process takes for articles? I think it's been stuck in articles for creation for some time now. Also, when i created the account, I thought that I was supposed to create the account under the article name, not my own. My email address is correct in there, but I can't change the username.

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Polacheck's_Jewelers 207.178.218.34 (talk) 18:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)RH

You will need to add references showing that the business has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. See Wikipedia:VRS for more information on this requirement. Once you have done so, you could resubmit the page for consideration by putting {{AFC submission}} at the top of it. There was previously a Resubmit button on the page, but you removed it in one of your edits. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:38, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

hi! i made the requested changes, can you let me know if there is anything else i need to do or if it's approved?

Review of User:GreenLips/sandbox

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bill Haney

HELP! Please someone help!!! I posted an article several months ago and it was declined by Aggie80 on March 13, 2014. I have tried every link and every way I know to contact Aggie80 and/or Wikipedia and make the necessary edits and improvements to please my biggest client, every spare minute for the last 2 months. I can't figure out how to talk to Aggie80. All I get is his Wiki page or his website. I have no idea how to proceed, but I must get this done NOW or loose my biggest client, because he thinks I'm incapable of doing this. He's right. I need to talk to someone on the phone or have direct email contact with someone. The live chat came in in HTML--I have no idea how it's supposed to work. This shouldn't be this hard. Why when I click Aggie80 links which are found in several areas, I don't get a type box or instructions on how to contact him in regard to a specific article. The client I am trying to post for has been involved in the authoring, publishing, marketing, or project managing over 200 books! Can someone please answer and can Aggie80 please contact me GreenLips (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging User:Aggie80 to reply here please. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:54, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pinged! See Talk The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 22:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I mean this in the nicest possible way - Wikipedia is a voluntary project, and people are expected to do things because they want to, and they enjoy them. While the skill to edit articles, particularly to get them to featured article status is something that I could see as being a paid professional job, paid editing carries a large stigma which is hard to shake off. Trying to write an article for money when you haven't understood Wikipedia basics is rather akin to walking up to a house, claim you can fix their plumbing without any knowledge of the subject, then panicking when the house floods. I wish you well, but I also hope this will be a worthwhile learning exercise for you. I am having a look now for reliable sources that will help, but if I can't find anything, and the community decides Mr Haney is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, he won't get an article. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for yours. I take the blame for giving people the impression that there is money being exchanged or that Mr. Haney is still an "active" client. He has been retired for some years now. That doesn't stop me from admiring him and being grateful for his mentorship to our company. He simply loves books and we create books. He has shared his vast knowledge, experience and to some degree, contacts with us all free of charge and out of the goodness of his heart and as previously mentioned, his love of books. Thanks again. GreenLips (talk) 17:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He's your biggest client but no money changes hands? That's quite cool. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Draft:Daniel James Brown

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Daniel James Brown

I've edited the submission for author Daniel James Brown in response to reviewer's Chris Troutman's feedback. Please verify that the second version has been correctly uploaded. The message for the initial submission is on the top of the page after the second submission, making me unsure if the second version uploaded properly. How are edited resubmissions handled? Do they go to the end of the queue? to the original reviewer?

Thanks for your help. I'll get the hang of this.

Granitedesk (talk) 19:44, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They just go into the queue, not in any particular location or order, and anyone who wants to can review them.

I have this question, or comment, for you. Barnes and Noble is a bookseller, right? If so, how is their comment about this person's work of any use in proving the notability of this person, based on what you have already been told? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:50, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Turkish Philanthropy Funds

Hi, According to the reviews since I have last submitted the post, there has been corrections and new edits to the article that we have written. I would like to ask if the article will be submitted for submission and if there are any edits that need to be made in the meantime.

Thanks, Ipek Ib598 (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 20

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jasson Austin

Please help me to improve this article.

Shoneeee (talk) 05:08, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:SANTABABES/sandbox

SANTABABES (talk) 10:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)SANTABAESSANTABABES (talk) 10:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hugo Chavez (1954-2013)]]

We already have an article about Hugo Chávez - you are welcome to help improve it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected again

Please can you explain why this has been rejected yet again, despite it being exactly the same format as this entry - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armaguard

Thanks

Armagard (talk) 11:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent reviewer of Draft:Armagard Limited declined it because the references do not establish the subject's notability. The reviewer never mentioned "format". The existing article you refered to is a very poor example - I expect it to be deleted soon. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

and so it has been DGG ( talk ) 18:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The two sources shown are from independent publications highlighting Armagard's award-winning status. If these are not satisfactory please could you tell us what is as the notability section and other 'helpful' resources are unclear.

Thanks.

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bo Barry

Can you tell me why the above referenced submission was declined? 68.40.41.10 (talk) 11:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the review? It's the pink box at the top of the page. There is an additional review comment below the box. A number of links to useful guide pages are included in the review - please follow those links. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The reasons in the decline template are very general, and the guide pages they make reference to are extremely extensive and detailed instructions, that are applicable to related problems in many different types of articles. I assume that if someone comes here they want advice specific to their actual article, and we ought to be prepared to provide it, rather than just send them back again to what apparently they did not adequately understand. The very purpose of this help page is to offer personal advice.

More specifically, we need references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases. The existing references are from a not-very-reliable newsletter, the advertising site he himself developed, the same site in the form of a newsletter on Facebook, and his own twitter. If what he has done is notable , there will be better sources that are truly independent of him, such as newspapers or trade magazinesIf you can find them, add them and resubmit the article. If not, there's no possibility of an article at this time. DGG ( talk ) 16:54, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Martin Watier (May 17)

I would like to know what I have to do for my submission to be accepted. What kind of references should I add? Thank You.Danie Roy (talk) 14:13, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The criterion is multiple significant roles. See WP:ENTERTAINER Some of the roles listed would be sufficient if he were the actor , not just the voice actor. In practice, articles about voice actors usually need to show that the specific contributions have been recognized by a major award, or by articles in major publications discussing him. It is possible that the cinemaniax article might do so, but it seems to be a dead link. DGG ( talk ) 18:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Martone Cycling Company

Did you read the sources I put down? They talk about the basket and the chain as a brand signature. I did not elaborate or use any sales terminology. There is no subjective language whatsoever in the article. I was very careful to phrase nothing in the article as it might be in an advertisement. If the article needs more sources, there are hundreds, but I didn't want there to be more lines of sources than there were lines of text. The company IS notable because it has been featured in dozens of newspapers, blogs, and magazines. It is also the ONLY bicycle brand (that I know of) in the niche that it occupies: high-design. Please, tell me exactly what needs to change to get this article accepted. I don't think the reviewers looked at the sources or did any research on their own to confirm the "notability." I basically just said, This is a bike company. It started here. You can recognize it by such and such. The colors are etc. How is that an advertisement? NickMartone (talk) 15:17, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has been questioned as to whether it's the best way to do things, but at present, reviewers are not required to do research of their own to establish a subject's notability. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the problem is sources. Looking at them, the first is essentially a press release, followed by some comments, not a full product review, in Huffington Post, a source we consider less than fully reliable. The second is a press release-product notice The third is another press release. The fourth, from Elle is an interview with him where the editor let him say whatever he wanted to: in other words, pure publicity. However, it does show that a reputable mainstream magazine thought him worthy of coverage. The fifth is another press release/product notice.

The requirement for references is that they provide substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. None of them really do that--they are minor notices, based upon press releases, or, in the case of the interview, not truly independent.

If the article were submitted to mainspace, it would be nominated for a AfD discussion, and the consensus would probably be to delete it. What you need is at least one better source: a full review, or an article about the company. DGG ( talk ) 17:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It occurs to me that the submission might have better been rejected under the "notability" (companies) criterion, rather than as an advertisement. Would be interested to know if DGG agrees... though I accept it doesn't make a huge difference since both decline reasons provide similar links (but different emphasis).

The one aspect that did seem overtly promotional was the use of the near-meaningless phrase "design-oriented". It may mean something to marketing people, but it means nothing to encyclopedia editors. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:28, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

actually, yes. The reason I gave was exactly the notability criterion. The article was not primarily or greatly promotional, but basically descriptive, and should not have been rejected on that grounds. Describing a good product does tend to promote it to those interested, but this cannot be avoided if we are to have articles on products or companies--we have to say what they are or what they make. The test is whether the amount of detail is so great as to be only relevant to a prospective purchaser. For example, in this case, if they had described indetail the different models. The description of the different colors might be viewed as somewhat promotional. The product is described in the references as appealing more to fashion than to practicality, and it would not be unreasonable to have indicated that in the article.

As for the amount of explanation needed, if someone asks why the sources aren't sufficient, we have to explain why, which means looking at the sources. In fact, we should do that before rejecting/accepting an article in the first place--because otherwise, how can we say that they do or do not support notability? What we don't normally do at AfC unless we want to is look for additional sources ourself-- though I point out that in listing for deletion at AfD or prod or speedy, we are strongly advised though not absolutely required to do just that--see WP:BEFORE. DGG ( talk ) 19:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Draft:Moodie Black

Hello,

I received an email that my article, wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Moodie Black, submitted for review, had been revised. It seems that article is still awaiting review, however. I just want to know if all is well with my article and that it is still in queue for review. Thank you. Jhiatus3 (talk) 16:25, 20 May 2014 (UTC)Jhiatus3[reply]

Yes this draft is awaiting review. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 06:39, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Avers (band)

Hi was wondering why the page I wanted to create titled Avers (band) was declined? Biancaalexia (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

The article about myself was declined. Why? I am verified on IMDB and other interne t sources. Can you tell me what I did wrong? Michael Daevid — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uspinme2 (talk • contribs) 21:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Writing an article about yourself is discouraged, as explained in Wikipedia:AUTOBIO. A likely difficulty is that Wikipedia does not consider IMDB a reliable source. We have a notability guideline for actors at Wikipedia:NACTOR, so any article would need to demonstrate how you pass that guideline using independent reliable sources. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 06:38, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 21

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Russian text removed, but some of the links are unavoidably russian.

E Guano (talk) 00:11, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Draft:Supersingular Isogeny Key Exchange

Hello,

I submitted an article for creation a while ago and the submission was declined 12 days ago. The comment was that the article needed a layman's description of the material as an introduction. I have added that introduction as suggested by the editor and resubmitted it. Was I supposed to bring the changes to the attention of the editor who requested the changes? How would I do that.

Thanks,

Carvalho1988 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carvalho1988 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Fiona Kotur (Marin)

Hi everyone! I'm glad that my submission was reviewed. However, would like to know what part have to be improved to have it accepted. Have a nice day! Kotur (talk) 05:51, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kotur. Your submission actually seems to be at Draft:Fiona Kotur (Marin). It looks in fairly good shape, though I have not looked into the references in detail. Probably the most important thing to do now is to sort out the references. Please refer to Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for how to do this. If you have any problems, please come back to us and we'll try and see where you're having difficulty. Once the references are sorted out, you should be fine to resubmit this draft for another review. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 07:15, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for creation/AM10001/ Definition of a practice manager

Hi, I am trying to add an article. First I was told it wasn't notable and I needed more references. Then my colleague added references and the whole article was deleted from my sandbox because it infringed copyright. Was this because a different computer was used? I then found a similar article on General Manager with a number of category sub headings under it such as Hotel and Sport , so I edited that to add a new sub heading, Healthcare, which fitted my article. Now that has completely disappeared as well. What should I be doing? AM10001 (talk) 06:02, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AM10001. Remember that you can click View History to see what edits have been made to an article, and the edit summaries explaining why. In this case your addition to General manager was removed in this edit with the edit summary "nowhere does it say general manager".

I can't see the content of your deleted sandbox, but at Wikipedia:COPYPASTE it is explained that you cannot copy and paste material from other websites (or books) directly into Wikipedia unless the material is explicitly licensed with a license acceptable to Wikipedia. Instead, you should summarise the sources in your own words. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 06:35, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]